Harvey’s lessons give blueprint for planning
If you have lived in Houston for any length of time, you have flood stories.
Hurricane Harvey has spawned enough new stories to fill a library, but the most amazing tale continues to be the indomitable spirit of Houstonians helping their neighbors in times of trouble. The reaction to Harvey is another testament to the incredible place we call home.
As floodwaters recede, and our area embarks on a massive cleanup and recovery effort, speculation is circulating about what kind of city we will be in the future.
How will the increasing frequency of major floods impact our desirability as a place to live? It is a question on the minds of current Houstonians as well as those considering moving here. We cannot afford to take a business-as-usual approach. This is the time — and our opportunity — to fundamentally reassess how we handle flooding in our region.
Before discussing what we should do in the future, it is important to place the current flood in context. The Houston region received more rain from Hurricane Harvey than any other American city has received from any storm in recorded history. Think about that. Some areas experienced what we call a 1,000– year flood, meaning there is a 0.1 percent chance of such a flood happening in any given year. For the past 40 years, our design standards have been calibrated for 100-year events. Even if all of our drainage systems were built to this standard (they aren’t), Harvey would have caused massive flooding across the entire area.
Public agencies have been trying to improve drainage for decades. The city of Houston collects a drainage fee that yields about $100 million per year, and last year Mayor Sylvester Turner appointed a flood czar to focus on drainage issues. The city estimates that getting all storm facilities up to standard would cost in the billions of dollars.
Meanwhile, the drainage fee itself is being challenged in court by Houston residents who don’t want to pay it.
Harris County, through the Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD), provides $60 million annually for capital projects, which have brought thousands of homes out of the 100-year floodplain.
But HCFCD estimates that bringing all bayous and streams up to design standards will cost billions of dollars more. With a $60 million budget, it would take the flood control district a lifetime to complete the task.
Other cities and districts in Southeast Texas have also tried to reduce flooding through infrastructure improvements, but these efforts are clearly inadequate.
If we keep doing things the same way, we will continue to regularly experience disastrous floods. Even bringing bayous up to standard will only mitigate the flooding, not stop it.
Maybe it is time to try something different. I offer these ideas simply as a way to begin discussion, and in hopes of eliciting more ideas from others. Together, we can forge a new path forward.
Design standards
We should consider moving away from one-size-fits-all standards. We could set higher protection standards for critical facilities like fire stations and hospitals, mandating they be built outside the 500-year floodplain. We could design the most critical roadways to ensure they remain drivable at all times. We could set required detention volumes for each stream to reduce runoff and control how runoff affects stream timing. We could mandate sustainable infrastructure wherever possible. We could significantly increase the use of buyouts to remove frequently flooded properties from the equation. We could perform a risk analysis for each new piece of infrastructure based on 500- and 1,000-year flood maps.
Funding
Unfortunately, we do not have enough money to make rapid progress. Much more federal and state funding is needed to produce significant change. Our Houston congressional delegation must come together to secure designated funding through federal Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) authorizations. They must also unite behind national flood mitigation legislation. Our state legislative delegation needs to take a similar approach. Houston represents about 30 percent of the state economy; we need to secure proportionate flood improvement funding from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB), just as we do with water supply funding.
And we can’t ask others to chip in unless we’re willing to do the same. Local elected officials must be honest with the public about the cost of protecting our city. We should set up a designated fund for flood reduction with a predictable annual budget. If we need to create this through a public referendum, let’s put it on the ballot. If we are unwilling to pay what it costs to protect Houston, we might as well all buy houseboats.
Regulations
Drainage problems occur regionally, yet much of our flood control policy is set by local jurisdictions. We should consider placing a single agency in charge of all Houston-area drainage planning. Instead of asking local agencies to coordinate and hoping for the best, this agency would make the plans and the local officials would carry them out. Special legislation might be required, and some local entities would likely resist being stripped of autonomy, but that is the price of keeping Houston safe. Our regulatory process is not working.
We must also rethink our current laissez-faire development style. Responsible planning for future development should include the consideration of how such development will affect downstream communities.
Harvey has been a great test for all of us. As we recover, I think we can agree Houston is a great city and that that we must ensure its future. We will never eliminate flooding in this region, but we cannot accept the status quo. As we rebuild, let’s build back better, stronger, and with an eye toward our future.
D. Wayne Klotz is a water resources engineer and senior principal at RPS Klotz Associates, a former president of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the president of the Coastal Water Authority.